Re: ORBit (was Re: * mico)

[Aadi Deshpande <aadi bigfoot com>]

And don't forget that MICO is a gpl'd (or the new term open-source) 
product while OmniORB isn't. This is why it was chosen over something like
ILU (which had a *lot* of language bindings in-place but wasn't all that
CORBAish)

aadi deshpande	
aadi@bigfoot.com
work://arcus.net
school://njit.edu


On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Phillip Dawes wrote:

> Mico was preferred because it supports more corba features that we need. 
> Corba standards that mico provides that omniorb doesn't include:
> 	Dynamic Invocation Interface
> 	Dynamic Skeleton Interface
> 	Interface Repository
> 	All the BOA activation modes, + a library activation mode
> 	Implementation repository
> 	Event service
> 
> The two orbs interoperate well though, so there's no reason you couldn't
> use omniorb to talk to the rest of gnome.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Phil.	
> -- 
> _______________________________________________________________________
>  Phil Dawes                               |   My opinions are my own
>  WWW:    err.. temporarily non-existant   |   and nothing to do with
>  Email:  philipd@parallax.co.uk           |      my employer.
> 
> 
> -- 
>          To unsubscribe: mail gnome-components-list-request@gnome.org with 
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
> 
>